Links to the "NKJV vs ESV" videos: kzread.info/dash/bejne/lWt7saZrY9icYMo.html and kzread.info/dash/bejne/fat1qLaLk5jQmcY.html . By the way, there is a typo in the video. I mistakenly identified the translation in the Thompson Chain (shown in the font comparisons section) as the '95 NASB. It presents the '77 NASB text, of course.

I'm a Roman Catholic, but I love the NKJV translation. I fell in love with it listening to the audiobook they put out awhile back. An Apocrypha would be greatly welcomed.

@requeteque1970

4 ай бұрын

You need to read the Bible and repent

@matthaeusprime6343

3 ай бұрын

@@requeteque1970 what a curious comment. As a Franciscan I repent everyday and I read and pray through the bible everyday. I pray you practice what you preach, and I will pray for you as well. Pax Vobis

One thing that I noticed in the video is that in the footnotes, references to things like "Bomberg" and "Syriac" are spelled out in full, whereas other recent NKJV Comfort Print editions (such as the Single-Column Reference Bible) as well as the Schuyler Quentel use the traditional NKJV abbreviations for these but have no explanation of the abbreviations or format the way that older editions of the NKJV do. Those of us who have been reading this version for decades know what those abbreviations mean, but I wouldn't have known what they meant when I first started reading the Bible. I wouldn't have known what "Bomberg" and "Syriac" meant either, but printing it in full instead of abbreviating them without explanation at least makes it easier to look up. Omitting "How to Use This Reference Bible" (as it is called in one of my older NKJV Bibles) also leaves the reader without an explanation of certain features of the cross reference system and an explanation of the different types of marginal notes. The NKJV also traditionally set off OT quotes in the NT in oblique type, (similar to the all caps in the NASB) something that has been dropped with the Comfort Print editions. (You may have noted this in a previous video.) Like you, I cannot tolerate red letters, although I didn't have a problem with them when I was younger. I'm not sure that blue would be workable either, although it might be a little more tolerable than red.

@magicsysrq8453

9 ай бұрын

You are right about the NKJV footnotes. The full set uses abbreviations heavily and having access to the Special Abbreviations page is necessary to understand those. Unfortunately, several NKJV editions that have come out in recent years with full notes (ie. Single-column ref. Bible) have skipped that page entirely which is a shame. A good edition that has it is the large print Verse-by-verse Maclaren. That one has the full set of Thomas Nelson cross-references also. This blue-letter thinline Maclaren has a reduced set of notes which does away with abbreviations entirely so it has no Special Abbreviations page. It also trims the translator's preface. I also have the compact Maclaren, which interestingly has the full preface and includes the Special Abbreviations page but comes with the reduced set of notes with no abbreviations. So that's an example where they provide the Special Abbreviation page unnecessarily. I guess we are dealing with a publisher that produces so many editions now that these seemingly small details are becoming very hit-and-miss. It's a shame because the NKJV has the best text critical notes in the market. In my opinion, they should never be trimmed or drowned in a sea of 42K or 72K cross-references at the bottom of the page.

I always enjoy your reviews. Thanks!

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for the kind comment, kree935!

Thank you, brother. Thorough and excellent work, as always.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for the kind comment, Tony!

Very nice thank you

Love your channel, could you please do a video showing us your library/ collection It would be awesome to see!

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for the recommendation, Ricardo! Many of my books are double-parked, so making that video could be challenging, but I'll think about it. Thanks for commenting!

I’d aim for a either a very dark navy blue or very dark purple. Or just dark black letter. But it is quite nice- thank you Dr. Jones.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting, Prentiss!

Very impressive breakdown.

Thank for your review!🔥🤟

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting, Larrym.!

Another great video RGJ!

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for the encouragement, Jeff!

I like the nkjv. It's a good translation. I only wish the nkjv had a translation of the apocrypha. Weird how the kjv did, but they never did for the nkjv.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

I agree - I wish there were an NKJV apocrypha. I think it would be easy to produce, since it's simply a matter of modernizing the KJV apocrypha. Thanks for commenting, legacyandlegend.

@markwrenn8569

Жыл бұрын

I bet the reason why there's no NKJV translation of the Apocrypha is because it's mainly used by American Evangelical Protestants, who don't consider the Apocrypha as “proper” books of the Bible (they consider only the books of the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament to Christians) and the New Testament as canonical). I also note from the close-up at 4:10 that the NKJV uses what's called “reverential capitalization” (the practice of writing personal pronouns referring to God or Jesus with a capital letter, regardless of their actual position in a sentence). This is something that always jars with me, as it doesn't feel natural English to me

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

@@markwrenn8569 - I don't doubt you're right. If the publisher thought there was profit to be made from printing the NKJV with the Apocrypha, they would do so. Thanks for commenting!

Thank you for the video. I always appreciate your detailed overviews of this or that Bible. One question which may seem odd: did you enjoy your education in the natural sciences? I do not have a doctorate, but managed a masters in petroleum engineering. That was more than enough for me. But I noticed that many of my peers in this study had no interest or love for the subjects we laboured over. Which is why I ask you about your experiences in this same field. I do not wish to pry into sensitive matters, so feel free to ignore my question if it is too personal🙂 Anyway, thank you for the detailed work on these Bibles. I have learned quite a bit from your videos over the years.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for the encouraging comment, and for the question, Arthur! Yes, I'm very happy with the education I had in physics. It still interests me, and it has kept me gainfully employed for several decades now. In retrospect, I think my talent set would have been a better fit to medicine; but I had essentially zero people skills in my college years, so I doubt that would have worked out.

Excellent review as always! Any chance you'd do more translation comparisons in the future?

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for the kind comment, TJ! Yes, I hope to do more translation comparisons.

I just ordered the imitation leather, that's my price point right now. I also want to get their verse by verse. I know that one's not blue letter, but for some reason I prefer verse by verse format. That's a personal preference.

I own this bible and like it quite a bit. I prefer the blue to red, i think i would have preferred it in black, but it is still one of my favorites.

wait...where's your watch?! :-)

I’m typically not drawn to the blue bibles or blue accents and such, but watching this video, I’m becoming a fan. I love the NKJV second only to the KJV, but I just can’t get myself to spend premium bible money on anything except the traditional KJV translation. Then again, I don’t even own a premium KJV bible lol. Just several different CBP variations. My favorite being the turquoise. That’s about to change though. Probably going for a Cambridge Topaz in green goatskin since they don’t offer a brown, or maybe a traditional Concord in that beautiful brown, mahogany calfskin, full yapp, which is an EB exclusive. It’s just getting harder and harder to read the smaller fonts. Love the reviews btw!

@seanwalsh6649

4 ай бұрын

This is not a premium Bible.

Thanks. Can you tell us something about the book visible on the desk that has “Prayer (1867)” on it?

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Yes. In fact, I plan to do a short video about it within a few weeks. It's a reproduction of an 1867 printing of John Cosin's 1627 "A Collection of Private Devotions: In the Practice of the Ancient Church, Called the Hours of Prayer." Thanks for the question!

Good review! I know you don't care for the red lettering. Is blue tolerable? I would much rather just have large lettering that was easier to read. What do you think? Thank you.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for the question, Dave. I'm trying to make up my mind about blue letters. I prefer black, but dark blue and dark red seem about the same to me. They both cause me some eye strain, but it's not as severe as what I get from faintly printed red or pink letters.

I really like the blue lettering... hope they distribute the KJV soon.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting, Confederate Berean!

@lemmingfiftyone

Жыл бұрын

I've no preference between black/blue/red for the words of Christ. But I think one purpose of using color is to quickly pick out those verses when paging through. This edition kind of loses that by also using blue for the subject headings and chapter numbers. "... (page) (page) (page) ah here ... oh, no, that's a heading (page) (page)..."

I cant handle the bedazzled art gilding , but thats just me. I cant get used too the bottom of the page refrence layout, ive tried but it just bugs me. Thats why I like my old open bible with lazy after verse refrences . 😁

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

After-verse references are the easiest - and, following those, beside-column references just at the verses they connect to. Thanks for commenting, Airik1111!

Hello Mr Grant Jones. I have a question for you about bible translations. Nothing too difficult of course… Just your opinion. Which version do you find to be the most Theologically neutral, yet maintains scholarly consistency to the original languages; whether it is word for word or thought for thought… either is ok. Thanks for any opinion that you may be able to share. Best regards. David

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

David - it seems to me most of the major translations these days strive for theological neutrality. You can see the way Catholic translations have moved in that direction in the Confraternity New Testament video I posted a week or so ago. The NIV shows some bias in favor of Evangelical understandings, I think. It would be an interesting project to select a set of verses that have been translated in biased ways, and then score a group of translations against that set. That way, one could possibly get an objective sense for bias in modern translations - which I have no strong opinion about at the moment.

@djpodesta

Жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones I agree with you about the NIV. I have used that translation all my life, but now that my eyes have been opened to subtle biases… I am a little disappointed in myself. I have all the main translations, NIV, NKJV, KJV, NASB and ESV… but since I saw your video about the RSV, I have been thinking about switching to either the RSV (for our era English) or the NRSV… but (again) I think that I am beginning to ‘over think’ things.

@djpodesta

Жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones I should have mentioned that I first went with the NIV for its International English back in the 1980s… being Australian, I found its sentence structure the most intelligible out of the few versions that we had on offer… and I guess that its familiarity stuck with me. :)

Thanks for being honest about the crusty pages ♥️. Is the air gone out yet ?

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Sorry, Matthew 16:18, but I don't understand the question.

Thanks to your channel I know a lot of English Bible translation. My understanding is that the broadest, and most fair ones are NRSV and ESV, hence more useful for academic study and comparison. Both also have all 18 Apocrypha books. But others such as KJV, NIV, NKJV, NJB etc are narrower and denomination oriented.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting, Hassan. I'm not sure your characterization as "narrower and denomination oriented" is accurate, except in the case of the NJB. People in a wide range of denominations use the KJV, NIV, and NKJV.

@hassanmirza2392

Жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones I mean these are protestant translations, but not accepted by Catholics and Orthodox. I might be wrong as my info is limited. I have read that English speaking universities prefer NRSV for teaching and more conservative seminaries use ESV.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

@@hassanmirza2392 - Many Catholics and Orthodox, in my experience, like the KJV, particularly the editions that include the apocrypha. Editions of the RSV and NRSV that include a large number of additional books, like the New Oxford Annotated Bibles, are widely used by Protestants and Catholics, and I've known Orthodox who used the RSV NOAB. But conservative Protestants tend to avoid both the RSV and NRSV.

@hassanmirza2392

Жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones Yes, RSV, NRSV, ESV have complete canonical books, so other denominations will prefer it. I was talking about the rest of many protestant translations. For academic study NRSV and ESV are desirable.

do not know about that blue, brother Jones.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

I'm on the fence too, but I will say that it beats bright pink. Thanks for commenting, Dani!

@jazzmonk5670

Жыл бұрын

Blue letter/red letter are marketing tricks.

👍🏾👍🏾 on the review, 👎🏾👎🏾on the blue letter (👎🏾👎🏾on red/blue letter bibles).

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for the kind comment, JazzMonk!

this is a 10 point font, this is not large print